Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

[LennardF]

@andrewaagamer Turns and rounds are different, if it said “each round” I would agree. Each country gets a turn during a round. I think it’s a legal move.

[AndrewAAGamer]

Adding more details for any “But load one Allied unit first and then offload the other Allied unit second” comments.

Europe 1940 2nd Edition Rulebook (Page 33) (BOLD added by me)

Land units belonging to friendly powers must load on their controller’s turn, be carried on your turn, and offload on a later turn of their controller. This is true even if the transport remains in the same sea zone.

The key here is to understand that while the transport is not leaving the sea zone it is moving from one coast line to another. Since that movement occurs on the transport owner’s Turn the transport cannot be on both coasts to both load and unload an Allied unit. It is one or the other.

[AndrewAAGamer]

@lennardf I am replying to Gamerman01’s question, not aequitas-et-veritas’ example. aequitas-et-veritas’ example is legal.

[gamerman01]

Thanks guys - yeah, AeV’s answer was good but not my situation.
Andrew, I am thinking the same way as you, but still not sure.
Because what if you imagined the transport picking up the infantry on the ground and then dropping the infantry that was on board?
You totally may be right, but I think I need to hear it from someone else too before I know for sure.
The allied unit that’s loading is waiting a turn to be unloading. The one on the transport would be unloading, so they are both indeed carried by the ally’s transport during their turn.
And back to the first post where you bolded, I don’t know that the transport is consided to be offloading first (and therefore DONE for the turn), or if it can be considered that it is loading first, then offloading the other.
Again, you are probably right, but I’m not totally sure still, from the rulebook wording. Thank you everybody!!!

[Krieghund]

@gamerman01 @AndrewAAGamer is correct.

The rules say that allied units must remain on the transport for a round before offloading, even if the transport doesn’t have to move, strongly implying that the transport “moves within the sea zone” during the ally’s turn between the moving power’s turns. Applying that principle disallows a move such as this. However, if the two units loaded from and offloaded to the same territory, it would be OK. Of course, the only reason I can think of to do that is to trade an infantry for another unit type.

Needless to say, the unit not on the transport must load before the unit already on the transport offloads, as offloading disallows any further activity on/by the transport in the turn.

[gamerman01]

@krieghund said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@gamerman01 @AndrewAAGamer is correct.

the transport “moves within the sea zone” during the ally’s turn between the moving power’s turns.

Thanks for the brilliant answer (and extremely fast) as always, Krieghund.

@AndrewAAGamer Your last answer, especially, was brilliant also, and spot on - I just didn’t fully comprehend it yesterday. Absolutely no disrespect meant, and again, thank you for taking the time and trouble to help me out.

[oysteilo]

In short,what is the conclusion?

[gamerman01]

You can’t do it.
Your ally can’t load a ground unit onto your transport at the same time one on the transport gets off (to a different territory)

I had a French unit on the USA transport in the English Channel, and wondered if I could unload him on Europe while the 2nd French infantry got onto the same USA transport. All during the French non-combat phase, of course.

You can’t do that.

[gamerman01]

Eh, except Krieghund pointed out the unit on the transport could get off on the same territory that the other ground unit is boarding the transport. This is because it’s the same coast and the transport doesn’t have to move. But one getting on from one coast and one getting off on another coast is not allowed because even within the same sea zone, the transport would have to “move” which can only be done on the transport owner’s turn.

Krieghund also pointed out that this legal move would only be useful if you wanted to replace the ground unit that’s on the transport with a different type of ground unit that was on the same territory

So if you want the simple answer, see the first reply that I just made :hushed:

[LennardF]

As I recall… if you have any enemy warship in your territory you can’t load transports in that sea zone - the old “Sneaky Pete”. TripleA is not abiding by this - is this something TripleA is not handling correctly or am I mis-remembering the rule?

Example. Japan has a transport in SZ 34 and two infantry on Paulau. There is an Anzac cruiser in SZ 34 as well. Japan has now declared war on the British & Anzac but TripleA is still allowing me to load those Japanese infantry. Is this a TripleA problem or is this a legit move for the Japanese?

[barnee]

@lennardf I don’t think it matters on the first turn you declare war. Try it when already at war.

Edit
Yea just tested. It allows it on the turn you declare war but not after

[Panther]

@lennardf said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

As I recall… if you have any enemy warship in your territory you can’t load transports in that sea zone - the old “Sneaky Pete”. TripleA is not abiding by this - is this something TripleA is not handling correctly or am I mis-remembering the rule?

Example. Japan has a transport in SZ 34 and two infantry on Paulau. There is an Anzac cruiser in SZ 34 as well. Japan has now declared war on the British & Anzac but TripleA is still allowing me to load those Japanese infantry. Is this a TripleA problem or is this a legit move for the Japanese?

This is allowed because of an exception stated in the Rulebooks:
“During your Combat Move phase in which you entered into a
state of war, your transports that are already in sea
zones that have just become hostile may be loaded
in those sea zones (but not in other hostile sea
zones). In effect, transports may be loaded in their
initial sea zones for amphibious assaults before war
is declared, while the sea zone is still friendly.”

(see Rulebook Pacific 1940.2, page 11, “Declaring War” blue box)

[LennardF]

@panther OK there it is in my manual too… thanks for clarifying.

Unless I’m missing something the Sneaky Carl was never a valid move.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/34014/the-sneaky-carl

[LennardF]

@barnee Thanks Barnee, TripleA isn’t always right which is why I was checking the hive mind.

[aequitas-et-veritas]

@lennardf said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@panther OK there it is in my manual too… thanks for clarifying.

Unless I’m missing something the Sneaky Carl was never a valid move.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/34014/the-sneaky-carl

I think you are mixing up three different things.

The Sneaky Karl is valid due to the fact that you place an UK DD in sz 36 where usually a IJN stack with TTs is sitting there ( most of the time unloaded).
UK pac remains frienfly , while Anzak declares war on Japan.
The sz is now hostile at the beginning on Js turn.

The Sub Hack.
works like this:
An enemy sub is placed in a sz containig unloaded TTs.
The opponent has now to choose to:
A) fight the Sub, but this denies to load and unload in NCM, or
B) don’t fight the Sub and perform an amphib assault elsewhere.

Or the scenario you described and this was successfully explained and answered allready.

[gamerman01]

Isn’t there a C) leave the zone (that has the enemy sub) in the combat movement phase? In this case the transport cannot pick up ground units before leaving unless it goes and unloads them on a hostile territory else where. This is possible because with only a sub, that sea zone is not hostile. The transport can’t load units and come back to orginal seazone and conduct amphibious assault without an accompanying warship though, because subs prevent lone transports from unloading amphibious assault in its zone (without an accompanying warship)
Looking at this today, I think I was confused, so strike it.

[gamerman01]

@aequitas-et-veritas said in [Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

The Sub Hack.
works like this:
An enemy sub is placed in a sz containig unloaded TTs.
The opponent has now to choose to:
A) fight the Sub, but this denies to load and unload in NCM, or
B) don’t fight the Sub and perform an amphib assault elsewhere.

Or the scenario you described and this was successfully explained and answered allready.

You find your transports are in a zone with enemy subs at the beginning of your turn, right?
You can ignore the sub for movement purposes. So you also have options
C) Leave the transports there. You will need to have warships there at the end of your turn or the enemy subs can sink all your transports when their turn comes around.
D) You can ignore the subs during the combat movement phase, there will be no combat (you will not lose your transports) and you can non-combat move the transports and pick up and drop off ground units as desired, including from the coastal territories adjacent to where the transports started.

The sub does not make the zone hostile, so the rules on pages 13-14 do not apply.
The sub can be ignored for movement purposes, and does not create combat during the combat movement phase.

Page 32 under submarines, “doesn’t block enemy movement”

If I’m understanding the question and situation correctly.

[aequitas-et-veritas]

Correct @gamerman01 , the Sub Hack forces you to make a decission on wheter to attack or not attack the Sub in order to go with the following consequences.
This applies especially if you have this situation in a convoy zone where you have to choose to attack the sub and therefore can’t NCM load/offload your TTs or let it sit there, load and offload as you wish and deal with convoy dmg.

I do frequently use the Sub Hack in my League games as Allies and as Axis Player.

[gamerman01]

Gotcha, thanks, sounds like we’re on the same wavelength then. If you want to attack the sub, the transports have to leave in combat movement phase if you want to move ground units with them, and then you have to go for amphibious assault somewhere, yes, as you said

[jkeller]

@krieghund Hello so am told you are the final answer when it comes to rule interpretations! By the way thank you so much for your work on this incredible game. It has brought me countless hours of entertainment. I have a question for you. Let’s say there is a destroyer built in sea zone around Japan by an American IC in Korea and there is a large Japanese fleet there (in same sea zone) including transports. I know the Japanese transports cannot load from Japan in combat movement due to the presence of the destroyer. Assuming the Japan fleet stays put including the transports and wins the sea battle, can Japanese land units then load onto the transports ( but not offload) from Japan during noncombat?